Results -- Coincidence, Correlation, or Causation?

Coincidence, Correlation, or Causation?


In 2007, Seattle adopted Everyday Mathematics and greatly increased spending on Professional Development in Math for all teachers. Math Class time was also increased to a 75 Minute minimum. In SY 2008-2009 Seattle RIFed teachers but spent $11 million dollars on 111.5 academic coaches to coach teachers. These coaches were not all math coaches.

The results, on the Grade four Math WASL, were stagnant and any improvement could hardly be attributed to the choice of instructional materials. It seems given all the other changes that if any improvement occurred, it was in spite of the instructional materials.

With Everyday Math, Math achievement gaps expanded for each of the following subgroups Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian, Low Income, and Limited English students.

Results - Mathematically Sound Foundations

You can follow the cohorts by tracking the color diagonally from Upper left to lower right. Note for Black students there was NO improvement in spite of all the expensive add-ons. Scores got worse at Grade 4 with Everyday Math. The Superintendent recommended a vertical alignment with k-8 materials for high school so that k-12 materials would be vertically aligned.

White scores and the White minus Black Gap are on the next page.

Results - Mathematically Sound Foundations
Note even with all the interventions the White students scoring is below the score of Spring 2007.

Results - Mathematically Sound Foundations

The Superintendent recommended the “Discovering” materials because they were well aligned with k-8 materials. Cheryl Chow, Peter Maier, Steve Sundquist, and Sherry Carr voted to approve the Discovering materials. At the next board meeting on May 20, 2009 Martha McLaren and Danaher Dempsey in testimony before the board announced we are taking you to court. Legal action was warranted.

The Bethel School District adopted Everyday math in 2007 just like Seattle and had adopted “Discovering” a year earlier in 2006. This year Seattle is using exactly the same k-12 math materials as Bethel. So how is it going in Bethel for Black students?

Results - Mathematically Sound Foundations


Seattle Schools have just achieved their highest Math “White – Black” achievement gap ever at 51.5% and the Superintendent is apparently feeling so go about it that she is advocating for appealing the Judge’s order of Remand. Remand means the board must reconsider their decision this time evaluating all the evidence. The decision was based on 1100 pages including 0 from the public. All means all 1400+ pages.

The Preamble of Article IX of the state constitution states: “It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex.”
Appeal on what grounds? Is it an excellent idea to exclude evidence? This is a Republic and all are to be protected by their constitutional rights. Are Maria Goodloe-Johnson and her staff opposed to this concept? Meanwhile Martha is still $7000 in the whole. Please donate at Seattle Math Group or contact us HERE to buy a Shirt.





Dear Seattle School Director,

This week you received an analysis of Math scores by David Orbits. Both Mr. Orbits and I are concerned with the failure of decision-makers in mathematics to adequately serve educationally disadvantaged learners. Empirical research is disregarded by decision-makers to the detriment of disadvantaged learners.

I have decided to look at results in Bethel SD, which uses EDM – Connected – Discovering just as Seattle will be doing this year. Bethel adopted EDM the same year as Seattle both have used Everyday Math for two full school years. Bethel has used the Discovering Series for three years. There are shocking similarities in the Discovering results from Bethel that parallel the inadequacies of IMP at Cleveland over the same three years. Bethel’s level 1 numbers were declining until Discovering was adopted and then began rising. Here are Bethel’s Level 1 absolute numbers for the three years before and then three years after:
2004 : 2005 : 2006 ::-:: 2007 : 2008 : 2009
525 478 361 :-: 470 501 : 555

In my comparisons, I tried to look over a span of years where the initial state score was near the 2009 state score for all students. Grade four from 2003 to 2009. Grade 7 from 2005 to 2007. Grade 10 from 2004 to 2009. Because in 2006 Seattle changed who was tested as a 10 grade WASL student I did not do a span comparison of Seattle at grade 10. This Seattle change resulted in 10th grade math pass rate moving from 40% to 55% in one year. The grade 7 Math WASL was significantly altered prior to 2005.

I wish I had a better test than the WASL to use.
I still have yet to get any results from the Fall 2008 PSAT given district wide to 10th graders.

It should be noted that the re-classification change in 2006 reduced the number of students classified as 10th graders substantially from 2005 numbers by the following percentages:
ALL = -24% ; White = -16% ; Black = -38.5% ; Low Income = -41.5% (This gives a nice guide to which student groups are not being well served by the district. Only 6 of 10 low Income Students advanced from grade 9 to grade 10 in 2006.)

I hope you find the following data pages useful. I leave you with three thoughts:
1… Where is the data that shows Seattle has achieved performance that is superior or equal to that achieved by successful programs (not simply the administration’s last unsuccessful attempt)?
2… Those in the direct instruction program (k-3) were twice as likely as their peers in other programs to graduate from high school. (Project Follow Through). Why does the district distain Direct Instruction in Math and other subjects and yet claim to be concerned about disadvantaged learners and the achievement gaps?
3… Cleveland increased its WASL math score in 2009 moving from last place in the district to above Rainier Beach. Only Cleveland scored higher in 2009 than in 2008. All other 9 comprehensive high schools scored lower in Math as did Nova, Center, and Pathfinder. A sound k-8 program is the basis for high school success and k-4 years are of most importance.

Sincerely,

Danaher M. Dempsey, Jr.




Bethel 4th Grade Math ALL 4th Grade Math White 4th Grade Math Black
Year District State District State District State
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
14.20%
26.70%
29.80%
34.10%
48.20%
50.10%
56.30%
53.10%
54.50%
49.70%
44.90%
46.40%
31.20%
37.30%
41.80%
43.40%
51.80%
55.20%
59.90%
60.80%
58.90%
58.10%
53.60%
52.30%
15.20%
27.90%
32.00%
36.00%
51.00%
52.10%
59.30%
57.60%
58.30%
55.40%
50.80%
51.60%
35.40%
42.50%
47.20%
49.10%
57.40%
61.50%
66.00%
67.90%
65.30%
65.10%
60.70%
59.60%
5.80%
21.30%
16.50%
24.80%
30.50%
38.20%
39.70%
35.70%
29.70%
28.90%
28.60%
27.7%
13.00%
15.30%
18.70%
19.50%
28.60%
35.50%
37.50%
37.70%
36.40%
35.10%
31.30%
30.2%

All students drop of 3.7 from 2003 to 2009

3.7/50.1 = 7.4% drop for all
White students drop of 0.5 from 2003 to 2009

0.5/52.1 = 1% drop for White grade 4 students
Black students drop of 10.5 from 2003 to 2009

10.5/38.2 = drop of 27.5% for Black grade 4 students

change was 26.5% worse than for Whites :-: Gap = 23 points







Bethel 4th Grade Math Hispanic 4th Grade Math LOW Income

Year District State District State

1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
13.60%
17.90%
19.20%
26.90%
41.90%
40.50%
51.60%
36.00%
43.80%
40.20%
31.90%
39.80%
11.40%
14.20%
18.20%
20.00%
29.30%
30.70%
38.80%
35.80%
36.90%
35.50%
31.30%
29.40%




40.10%
45.60%
49.90%
40.60%
38.10%
37.50%
35.30%
38.00%





40.40%
44.70%
43.80%
42.50%
40.70%
36.90%
36.10%



Hispanic students drop of 0.7 from 2003 to 2009

0.7/40.5 = drop of 1.7% for Hispanic grade 4 students
Low Income students drop 7.6 from 2003 to 2009

7.6/45.6 = drop of 16.7% for Low Income students

Gap of 13.6 points




Seattle 4th Grade Math ALL 4th Grade Math White 4th Grade Math Black
Year District State District State District State
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
34.80%
35.80%
44.30%
43.50%
51.10%
53.10%
59.60%
59.10%
59.50%
61.90%
56.40%
59.80%
31.20%
37.30%
41.80%
43.40%
51.80%
55.20%
59.90%
60.80%
58.90%
58.10%
53.60%
52.30%
52.50%
55.10%
62.90%
65.60%
70.00%
71.80%
78.00%
79.60%
76.00%
79.80%
73.90%
78.70%
35.40%
42.50%
47.20%
49.10%
57.40%
61.50%
66.00%
67.90%
65.30%
65.10%
60.70%
59.60%
14.20%
12.00%
17.20%
15.00%
22.30%
31.10%
36.40%
33.10%
31.30%
32.00%
27.60%
28.90%
13.00%
15.30%
18.70%
19.50%
28.60%
35.50%
37.50%
37.70%
36.40%
35.10%
31.30%
30.20%

Scores for all Seattle students rise 6.7 from 2003 to 2009

6.7/53.1 = 12.6% increase for all students

Math instruction time increased to 75 min per day
began in 07-08
White students’ scores increase by 6.9 from 2003 to 2009

6.9/71.8 = increase of 9.6% for White students
Black students’ scores drop by 2.2 from 2003 to 2009

2.2/31.1 = drop of 7.1% for Black students

change was 16.7% worse than for White students
Gap is now about 50 points







Seattle 4th Grade Math Hispanic 4th Grade Math LOW Income

Year District State District State

1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
23.50%
23.00%
31.50%
28.70%
38.10%
36.30%
43.90%
37.40%
39.60%
43.50%
33.50%
37.90%
11.40%
14.20%
18.20%
20.00%
29.30%
30.70%
38.80%
35.80%
36.90%
35.50%
31.30%
29.40%




35.30%
37.80%
40.30%
37.50%
39.30%
40.00%
33.70%
36.20%





40.40%
44.70%
43.80%
42.50%
40.70%
36.90%
36.10%



Hispanic Students rise 1.6 from 2003 to 2009

1.6/ 36.3 = 4.4% increase for Hispanic students
Low Income drop 1.6 from 2003 to 2009

1.6/37.8 = 4.2% lower for low income

Gap is 42.5 points





Bethel 7th Grade Math ALL 7th Grade Math White 7th Grade Math Black
Year District State District State District State
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
7.50%
11.70%
14.90%
12.30%
18.80%
23.50%
33.90%
39.70%
33.00%
45.60%
39.60%
45.40%
20.10%
24.20%
28.20%
27.40%
30.40%
36.80%
46.30%
50.80%
48.50%
54.60%
50.50%
51.80%
8.30%
14.40%
15.40%
13.80%
20.10%
25.30%
36.80%
44.10%
36.30%
50.10%
42.90%
49.30%
22.80%
28.10%
32.40%
31.60%
34.40%
41.60%
52.20%
56.70%
54.50%
61.10%
56.80%
58.10%
4.10%
2.80%
10.70%
4.00%
8.90%
9.00%
25.50%
28.70%
17.60%
31.00%
28.70%
24.70%
4.90%
6.80%
8.70%
7.80%
10.30%
14.10%
21.40%
25.40%
24.50%
30.10%
28.00%
28.20%

Rise in scores for ALL of 5.7 from 2005 to 2009

5.7/39.7 = 14.4% increase for ALL
White increase 5.2

5.2/44.1 = 11.8% rise
Black drops 4

4/28.7 = 13.9% drop :-: Gap = 24.6 points







Bethel 7th Grade Math Hispanic 7th Grade Math LOW Income

Year District State District State

1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
1.90%
5.60%
3.70%
8.50%
15.80%
16.70%
22.50%
22.20%
17.10%
32.30%
32.20%
38.10%
5.50%
7.20%
9.70%
8.40%
11.60%
14.70%
22.20%
27.40%
25.50%
32.00%
27.10%
29.40%






27.20%
30.30%
21.80%
34.60%
28.80%
33.60%





19.80%
27.00%
32.40%
30.30%
35.90%
31.40%
34.00%



Bethel Hispanics up 15.9 from 2005 to 2009

15.9/ 22.2 = 71.6% increase for Hispanics at grade 7
Bethel Low Income up 3.3

3.3/30.3 = 10.9% increase for LOW Income students :
Gap = 15.7 pts




Seattle 7th Grade Math ALL 7th Grade Math White 7th Grade Math Black
Year District State District State District State
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
21.80%
26.90%
30.90%
29.90%
29.80%
33.90%
43.60%
47.30%
47.40%
53.30%
52.60%
56.20%
20.10%
24.20%
28.20%
27.40%
30.40%
36.80%
46.30%
50.80%
48.50%
54.60%
50.50%
51.80%
35.00%
46.50%
48.20%
48.40%
45.80%
50.00%
64.10%
65.10%
67.60%
73.40%
72.80%
74.40%
22.80%
28.10%
32.40%
31.60%
34.40%
41.60%
52.20%
56.70%
54.50%
61.10%
56.80%
58.10%
2.30%
4.70%
6.30%
5.10%
6.80%
7.30%
15.00%
17.40%
17.70%
24.10%
24.20%
23.00%
4.90%
6.80%
8.70%
7.80%
10.30%
14.10%
21.40%
25.40%
24.50%
30.10%
28.00%
28.20%

Scores for ALL rise 8.9 from 2005 to 2009

8.9/47.3 = 18.8% increase for ALL in Seattle at grade 7
White student scores up 9.3 from 2005 to 2009

9.3/65.1 = 14.3% up
Black students’ scores up 5.6

5.6/17.4 = 32.2% score increase :-: GAP = 51.4 points







Seattle 7th Grade Math Hispanic 7th Grade Math LOW Income

Year District State District State

1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
10.90%
15.40%
21.50%
17.50%
16.30%
19.20%
28.70%
33.40%
28.00%
32.70%
25.10%
38.30%
5.50%
7.20%
9.70%
8.40%
11.60%
14.70%
22.20%
27.40%
25.50%
32.00%
27.10%
29.40%




3.40%
7.10%
20.10%
24.40%
24.50%
29.50%
30.20%
32.80%





19.80%
27.00%
32.40%
30.30%
35.90%
31.40%
34.00%



Hispanic scores increase 4.9 from 2005 to 2009

4.9/33.4 = 14.7% increase
Low Income up 8.4 from 2005 to 2009

8.4/ 24.4 = up 34.4% for Low Income students
Gap = 41.6 pts




Bethel Grade 10 Discovering Series from Key Curriculum Press
First year of use was 2006-2007
Bethel 10th Grade Math ALL 10th Grade Math White 10th Grade Math Black
Year District State District State District State
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
21.10%
26.70%
26.30%
23.20%
28.90%
31.60%
39.90%
39.20%
36.10%
35.00%
30.30%
33.00%
35.00%
38.90%
37.30%
39.40%
43.90%
47.50%
51.00%
50.40%
49.60%
45.20%
23.50%
30.00%
27.80%
23.70%
29.50%
33.70%
43.10%
41.70%
38.40%
37.90%
33.70%
38.10%
40.10%
43.70%
41.90%
44.00%
49.20%
52.40%
56.50%
56.30%
55.70%
51.30%
10.10%
13.40%
10.20%
13.50%
17.80%
19.70%
21.40%
23.30%
26.60%
22.50%
17.60%
9.50%
11.70%
11.90%
13.00%
14.20%
16.10%
20.40%
23.20%
22.50%
22.20%
20.80%

Bethel All students pass rate dropped 1.3 from 2004 to 2009

1.3/31.6 = 4.1% drop for all students

Scores have continually declined over three years of adoption
White students pass rate remained the same from 2004 to 2009

Scores have continually declined over three years of adoption
Black students’ scores dropped 2.1 from 2004 to 2009

2.1/19.7 = 10.7% drop for Black students
Although scores were higher in the adoption year, since then they have declined annually.







Bethel 10th Grade Math Hispanic 10th Grade Math LOW Income

Year District State District State

1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
23.60%
13.30%
29.60%
22.20%
13.10%
22.50%
36.20%
33.30%
29.30%
25.00%
17.50%
11.60%
12.60%
14.60%
14.30%
16.20%
19.70%
23.90%
25.40%
25.60%
26.10%
23.30%





25.40%
30.10%
30.20%
28.90%
25.10%
18.70%





24.60%
28.10%
30.40%
30.50%
29.70%
27.10%



Hispanic students’ dropped 5.0 from 2004 to 2009

5/22.5 = 22.2% drop for Hispanic Students

Scores have continually declined over three years of adoption
Low Income dropped 7.7 from 2004 to 2009

7.7/25.4 = 30.3% drop for Low Income students

Scores have continually declined over three years of adoption





Cleveland HS Scores during three years of IMP

All students school district state
2006-07 17.9% 50.2% 50.4%
2007-08 12.2% 50.4% 49.6%
2008-09 21.2% 48.5% 45.2%

Black Students
2006-07 11.1% 19.6% 22.5%
2007-08 6.3% 16.0% 22.2%
2008-09 12.7% 16.3% 20.8% Achievement Gap = 57.1 points with SPS white students’ scores

Hispanic Students
2006-07 15.4% 31.3% 25.6%
2007-08 38.4% 26.1%
2008-09 14.3% 30.4% 23.3%

Low Income
2006-07 17.1% 26.7% 30.5%
2007-08 9.0% 27.6% 29.7%
2008-09 19.4% 25.8% 27.1%

Limited English
2006-07 15.4% 13.6% 10.7%
2007-08 4.8% 19.5% 12.7%
2008-09 0.0% 11.2% 8.0%

Asian/Pacific Islander
2006-07 31.8% 51.9% 59.9%
2007-08 25.7% 56.7% 61.3%
2008-09 30.8% 53.4% 57.1%

By the numbers of students for ALL at Cleveland WASL math results

Spring Year ; Enrolled in grade 10 ; passed ; no score ; Level 1 ; Level 4 ; (no score + level 1) / enrollm
2007 115 20 13 62 3 65.2%
2008 144 16 19 77 3 66.7%
2009 152 31 17 69 11 56.6%


Where is the data that shows Seattle has achieved performance that is superior or equal to that achieved by successful programs (not simply the administration’s last unsuccessful attempt)?
On what rationale was the Discovering Series adopted?


Year Enrollment No Score Level 1 No score plus level 1
As % of enrolled
BETHEL



spring 2004 1335 29 575 45.2%
spring 2005 1304 24 478 38.5%
spring 2006 1473 36 361 27%
Discovering Adopted
spring 2007 1430 59 470 37%
spring 2008 1403 40 501 38.6%
spring 2009 1364 44 555 43.9%
SEATTLE



spring 2004 3431 369 1200 45.7%
spring 2005 3557 337 1146 41.7%
spring 2006 2710 164 442 21.7%
spring 2007 3269 353 675 31.4%
spring 2008 3220 286 783 33.2%
spring 2009 3162 296 756 33.3%
Beginning Spring 2006 Seattle required sophomore credits to take the WASL
Prior to 2006 all second year students were to take the WASL this spiked pass rates up from 40% in 2005 to 55% in 2006
Enrollment drops from 2005 to 2006 at grade 10 38.5% drop in Black grade 10 enrollment 16% drop in White grade 10 enrollment 41.5% drop in Low Inc. Enrollment in grade 10 For ALL 24% drop in 10th grade enrollment
The highest no score rate was around 4% for Bethel in 2007
Seattle had a 9.36% no score rate in 2009


Seattle
Ethnicity (October 2008)
American Indian/Alaskan Native 894 1.9%
Asian 10,093 22.0%
Asian/Pacific Islander 10,093 22.0%
Black 9,692 21.1%
Hispanic 5,356 11.7%
White 19,933 43.4%
Special Programs
Free or Reduced-Price Meals (May 2009) 19,155 41.3%
Special Education (May 2009) 6,576 14.2%
Transitional Bilingual (May 2009) 5,434 11.7%
Migrant (May 2009) 274 0.6%
Other Information (more info)
Unexcused Absence Rate (2008-09) 31,084 0.7%
Annual Dropout Rate (2007-08) 1,299 9.8%
On-Time Graduation Rate (2007-08) 2,365 63.4%
Extended Graduation Rate (2007-08) 2,669 71.6%

Bethel
Ethnicity (October 2008)
American Indian/Alaskan Native 586 3.2%
Asian 1,580 8.8%
Asian/Pacific Islander 1,580 8.8%
Black 2,151 11.9%
Hispanic 2,127 11.8%
White 11,588 64.3%
Special Programs
Free or Reduced-Price Meals (May 2009) 7,208 40.0%
Special Education (May 2009) 2,537 14.1%
Transitional Bilingual (May 2009) 273 1.5%
Migrant (May 2009) 0 0.0%
Other Information (more info)
Unexcused Absence Rate (2008-09) 4,434 0.2%
Annual Dropout Rate (2007-08) 322 5.7%
On-Time Graduation Rate (2007-08) 918 73.3%
Extended Graduation Rate (2007-08) 1,007 80.4%

















More pages